Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1887-08-27
The paragraph below is clipped
from the Clearfeld letter of last
week to the Homecoming RevieaU:

from the Clearnelu leCter OIL laSC
week to the Homecoming Review:
And still the semi-monthly pay is the
theme of discussion among our miners and
many are the peculiar opinions expressed.
One class of men want to show fight and COM
pei by strike the payment every two weeks,
another class are disposed to arbitrate the
question, another class desire to try passage
of arms through the law, and so it goes,
everyone with his own views, but the law
itself is like all other laws for the benefit OF
the laboring class, absolutely worthless, and
made so by the proviso, without which, 1t is
said, it is unconstitutional. The mining law,
which is said to be very strict, is, according
to one of our eminent judges, legal curios-
ity, without any vitality, owing to the num-
ber of provisions and its peculiar construc-
ton, indefinite wording and obscure mean
ing, making it next to impossible for any
two judges to agree upon any point In II, as
all persons who read can tell by the many
constructions upon the same point Of law
throughout Pennsylvania. We are not find
ing fault with the makers of that law. for we
believe they did all they could, but if our
constitution demands provision to every
law passed favorable to the mass of people
who constitute the government, and that
proviso makes possible the avoiding OF the
fulfilment of the law, the sooner we change
our Constitution the better. Special contract
or personal contract, or whatever it may be
called, is allIwell and good, but when the law
is for the benefit of the many, we want no
proviso for the profit of the few.
Strange, strange, passing strange
are some peoples notions of organic
law!
Now here is a man, evidently sim
cere, who does not know that there
are some rights of which a free CIT
izen cannot divest himself.
One of those rights is the right to
make contracts or not make con-
tracts ; another is the right to think
or not think; another to speak or not
speak !; another to act or not act !;
another to work, and another not to
work. These rights are governed only
by law, for law is only our liberties
regulated ~ "the States collective
will"
Now, If the semi-monthly pay law
of Pennsylvania is unconstitutional
because it may be evaded by pleading
tie right of private contract, that is no
fault of the Constitution of the State,
but of the people to achom the aac par
ticu1arly applies. If every man thus
affected were to avail himself of one
of his indefeasible rights the law
would be obeyed by all employers
without exception, and not case
would come up to give occasion for a
judicial test Of the laws constitu-
tionality.
And the same thing could be just as
we'll done were there no law at all on
the subject.
This Pennsylvania law shows a
notable example of the futility of
enacting special Or class legislation.
1t shows that the people seeking
such Fictitious aid are not aware that
the State has no authority whatever
to do for them anything they are able
to do for themselves.
The suggestion to "change the
Constitution to suit certain want is
an inconsiderate one. A change, for
instance, taking away from working
men the right of private contract,
would furnish a logical and COM
manding precedent for "the few" to
demand and obtain, as the next step,
the reduction of "the many" to abso-
lutte slavery.